• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.

K

killer_clank

Member
Galvanise_ said:
Oh yeah, and they'd need to reimburse the UK for any of the renewable energy resources that exceeded the Scottish contribution to their construction, research etc. The bill goes up and up.
Click to expand...

All of these projects are built with private money, perhaps with a modest public contribution that comes out of Scottish tax revenues anyway.
 
M

Meadows

Banned
killer_clank said:
LOL seriously? A growing, educated population, with some of the best universities in the world and some of the most viable energy resources in the world, fossil and renewable, and a large tourism industry, and you're acting as if it's some basketcase that can't run it's own affairs properly? Come on. That argument doesn't wash in this day and age, and just makes people eager to prove these views wrong.
Click to expand...

funded by the fact that English students are charged shitloads.

Also, the tourists? Mostly English.

The money for your renewables? From the treasury.
 
W

Wrestlemania

Banned
Galvanise_ said:
Its not a Scottish asset though. Each country in the UK technically has contributed to it. There is absolutely no way in hell that the British government would just wave goodbye to that asset just because some guys up north voted in favour of pissing off. There would have to be a trade off at the very least.

Upon obtaining independence, Scotland would have to take on their fair share of national debt and then reimburse the remaining UK members for taking 100% possession of the asset. That would be acceptable.

I'd also want them to buy out the remaining British taxpayers stake in Scottish banks too, for the price we paid for them.
Click to expand...

Technically the Scots have contributed to a lot of things in England. Should they be divvying up all of that as well?
 
K

killer_clank

Member
funded by the fact that English students are charged shitloads.

Hardly. Currently they're only charged the same as England, and that will change next year but only to the same levels English unis will themselves charge. Don't forget because of the wonders of the Barnett Formula, the Scottish higher education budget gets cut by a shit ton. We basically have no choice. I agree it's an unfair situation, but what would you advocate?

Also, the tourists? Mostly English.

And they would magically stop coming?

The money for your renewables? From the treasury.


To a certain extent, yes, but most of it is private money. We are the UK currently, do you think this is unfair or something? Do you think England should no longer receive Scots monry for its projects?
 
S

StealthGoblin

Banned
Wrestlemania said:
Technically the Scots have contributed to a lot of things in England. Should they be divvying up all of that as well?
Click to expand...

In an ideal world, yes.

In my opinion though . . . .it is not the English, Welsh and Irish who are going to vote on bailing out. The terms for leaving the United Kingdom should be tough. If Scotland are willing to meet them, fair game and good luck to them.

Its going to be wildly expensive for Scotland, but if they want it so much, we shouldn't stand against them as long as the terms and conditions are met.

The United Kingdom is not abandoning Scotland. Scotland is abandoning the United Kingdom.
 
M

Meadows

Banned
Scottish people get more money per head from central government than people in other parts of the UK (apart from NI), so no I don't think it's fair.

Also, the idea of getting rid of a centralised UK army borders somewhere between delusional and insane.
 
K

killer_clank

Member
Meadows said:
Scottish people get more money per head from central government than people in other parts of the UK (apart from NI), so no I don't think it's fair.
Click to expand...

Ah, the Barnett formula. I'm not a fan either (I think we should just raise all of our tax in Scotland and give some back to London) but providing public services in Scotland costs slightly more for the same levels of service purely because a lot of it is sparsely populated.

not to mention Scotland was running a budget surplus for years (dunno if it is now though).

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/11/scotland-12288-union-public
 
PJV3

PJV3

Member
Galvanise_ said:
In an ideal world, yes.

In my opinion though . . . .it is not the English, Welsh and Irish who are going to vote on bailing out. The terms for leaving the United Kingdom should be tough. If Scotland are willing to meet them, fair game and good luck to them.

Its going to be wildly expensive for Scotland, but if they want it so much, we shouldn't stand against them as long as the terms and conditions are met.

The United Kingdom is not abandoning Scotland. Scotland is abandoning the United Kingdom.
Click to expand...

I don't see the point of that, Scotland has done its porridge, a fair share of the debt is enough.
How would Scotland fare when it comes to the EU money wise?
 
S

StealthGoblin

Banned
Wrestlemania said:
No - they should be fair.
Click to expand...

Tough, but fair yes. It is not the English, Welsh and Northern Irish population that will potentially vote on this wildly expensive and time consuming process.

In my opinion Scotland should:

  • Reimburse the United Kingdom for the North Sea Oil operation (fairly). Based on loss of future earnings and resources.
  • Reimburse the United Kingdom for any renewable energy resources construction commitments or already installed builds that exceed the Scottish contribution.
  • Buy out, in its entirety, the United Kingdom's stake in their banks.
  • Take their fair share of the United Kingdom's national debt.

They'd also have to pay their own annual EU membership fee, as their inclusion in the EU is not guaranteed if they obtain independence. That might also mean that Scotland is forced to take up the Euro as their currency because if they leave the United Kingdom, the opt-out for Scotland is null and void as they are a new independent state. Again, expensive. Also risky given the recent happenings in the Eurozone. They might be able to keep Sterling until they are given an opt-out but we'll see how that goes.

The UK rebate would also have to be taken into account, meaning that Scotland would have to pay a lot more for EU membership if they are no longer part of the United Kingdom.

By opting out of the UK, Scotland technically are opting out of the Euro until they rejoin again. That will not be looked upon favourably, particularly by France and Spain who are already fighting separatist movements within their own countries. Vetoes may occur on Scotland's application to join the EU.

Its all a bit mental isn't it. Ahh well.
 
A

avaya

Member
zomgbbqftw said:
I live in the real world, unlike you it seems.

Hammered by who, a couple of Eurocrats and MEPs, big fucking deal. They wield no power. The people that matter, the German Finance Minister - Wolfgang Schauble, has said we would be welcomed back to the table and there is time for our conditions to be met. Rumpy Pumpy, Barrosso and one French MEP doesn't constitute being hammered from all sides.

I work in the City, believe me there is a sense of relief that Dave used the veto, not just because he has protected Britain from some of the crazier proposals (EU oversight of national budgets) but also because now the EU knows that Dave will stand up for Britain's national interest. Previously under Brown and Blair they knew this wasn't the case and would just railroad changes that were bad for us knowing that the sitting PM wouldn't bat an eyelid.

On my sources, the only one that is self sourced is the rumour about the Bundesbank, and that comes from a German fellow who used to work for the Buba until last year so he is very well linked with the current Buba leadership. The rest are from statements from EU leaders. Finland are now out is the latest we have heard on our wires http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/news/2011/12/pm_finland_must_have_a_say_in_bailout_fund_3100771.html so 26 becomes 25.

On bonds, you mean like a couple of hours ago? Italy had to get away a few billion worth of 5y debt, they needed to give the highest ever interest rates (6.47%) since the beginning of the Euro. If this continues for more than a few months Italy will truly be insolvent as their interest payments top 10% of GDP. Putting that into context, the UK sold £3bn worth of long 10y debt and investors were given just 2.2% interest. Today's spot rates are 2.11% for Uk 10y and 6.75% for Italian 10y.

Italy's debt maturity average has gone down since last year from 13 years to about 8 years, UK debt maturity average has gone up from 17 years to 20 years over the past year as the Treasury has taken a very cautious view of the near future and funded long terms at super low interest rates. It means that Italy are being forced to sell short term debt (1-5 years) to keep the interest rates low, but all that does is pile up the pressure for the future. In 2015/16 Italy has a predicted net cash requirement of 12% of GDP, the UK has a predicted net cash requirement of just over 4% of GDP in the same year.
Click to expand...

Interesting you claim that his veto is well received in the city. You're not the only one working for parasites.

In reality the view is actually mixed, his veto hasn't done anything to stop QMV on FinReg. For the uk to be exempt from EU FinReg is completely at odds with the single market. They'd never give the UK exemption.
 
K

killer_clank

Member
The UK has already profited to insane extents off of North Sea Oil. The idea that Scotland owes it anything on that front is ludicrous. Share of national debt, that's A-OK, and as for the banks, they were British banks, not Scottish ones. Share of the national debt should cover that.
 
S

StealthGoblin

Banned
killer_clank said:
The UK has already profited to insane extents off of North Sea Oil. The idea that Scotland owes it anything on that front is ludicrous. Share of national debt, that's A-OK, and as for the banks, they were British banks, not Scottish ones. Share of the national debt should cover that.
Click to expand...

Loss of future earnings on investment. Loss of resources on invested properties.

Royal Bank of Scotland got £45 Billion. A bank with the VAST majority of its branches exclusively in Scotland. If Scotland obtain independence, I'd like my investment back. That seems reasonable. Scotland could then sort out a bank that largely operates on its own soil.
 
W

Walshicus

Member
Love the way the few remaining pro-UK people try to frame Scotland as a third world nation in waiting. Accept it, the UK is an anachronism as we move toward true nation states and the structures they build together.
 
K

killer_clank

Member
Galvanise_ said:
Loss of future earnings on investment. Loss of resources on invested properties.

Royal Bank of Scotland got £45 Billion. A bank with the VAST majority of its branches exclusively in Scotland. If Scotland obtain independence, I'd like my investment back. That seems reasonable. Scotland could then sort out a bank that largely operates on its own soil.
Click to expand...

But they were fully British banks. Scotland basically had no say in them and how they were operated, they were under the regime of lax London regulation that enabled them to get into the mess they did. There's probably more Natwest branches than RBS ones. I just genuinely don't see how they're exclusively Scotland's problem.
 
A

avaya

Member
Galvanise_ said:
Loss of future earnings on investment. Loss of resources on invested properties.

Royal Bank of Scotland got £45 Billion. A bank with the VAST majority of its branches exclusively in Scotland. If Scotland obtain independence, I'd like my investment back. That seems reasonable. Scotland could then sort out a bank that largely operates on its own soil.
Click to expand...

You don't understand how a bank works do you? Do you think RBS got to £1.9trillion balance sheet through Scottish deposits?

Stop embarrassing yourself.
 
R

radioheadrule83

Banned
Tablet = tastiest thing in the fecking world, and I love shortbread and the like too.

Once they have established themselves and recognised their new strengths in trading, I propose replacing armed guards and bouncers all over the country with Scots that show the brass boulders needed to punch burning terrorists unconscious. I don't care if they just send the money home and effectively take English jobs off the market by doing so. I also want to see Karen Gillan naked somehow. Make it so SNP!
 
S

StealthGoblin

Banned
avaya said:
You don't understand how a bank works do you? Do you think RBS got to £1.9trillion balance sheet through Scottish deposits?

Stop embarrassing yourself.
Click to expand...

I'd much rather them open an equal HQ in London in addition to Edinburgh. My issue is with their HQ being exclusively outside of the UK (once Scotland have independence) and that bank having a lot of United Kingdom taxpayers money propping it up. The same thing would apply to any other banks in a similar situation (of which I cannot recall any off of the top of my head, though there may be some). My stance on this is not anti-Scotland. I'd expect the same thing to apply to any other nation seeking the same thing.

The whole situation in less than ideal.
 
M

Meadows

Banned
I'd like to, again, make the assertion that the creation of a Scottish army is as follows:

1) Impossible
2) Delusional
3) A waste of resources
4) Bad for Scotland
5) Bad for England

For example, there is a disproportionate amount of Scottish soldiers in the UK army, what is Scotland going to do with all of the soldiers that have no jobs? There's no need for them to have a big army as they'll obviously go into a neutral status a la Ireland (which is, to be fair, commendable). As well as creating a strain on the Scottish economy there'll be a shortfall in the number of soldiers in the British army, although that could be solved by increasing recruitment, which would lower employment in the medium to long term.
 
R

radioheadrule83

Banned
Galvanise_ said:
I'd much rather them open an equal HQ in London in addition to Edinburgh. My issue is with their HQ being exclusively outside of the UK (once Scotland have independence) and that bank having a lot of United Kingdom taxpayers money propping it up. The same thing would apply to any other banks in a similar situation (of which I cannot recall any off of the top of my head, though there may be some). My stance on this is not anti-Scotland. I'd expect the same thing to apply to any other nation seeking the same thing.

The whole situation in less than ideal.
Click to expand...

84% of RBS is owned by the UK taxpayer, in a scenario where I'm trying to find the metrics to agree Scotland taking on some of the national debt burden, I would apply those same metrics to the shares of RBS -- meaning that the new Scottish government is forced to take on (buy) a proportion of shares directly from the rest of the Union. The UK government keeps the remaining shares until such time as it is able to sell them - essentially reducing the ownership to zero, eventually... or perhaps keeping them as to maintain a stake when the bank returns to profitability.
 
G

Guerrillas in the Mist

Member
Meadows said:
I'd like to, again, make the assertion that the creation of a Scottish army is as follows:

1) Impossible
2) Delusional
3) A waste of resources
4) Bad for Scotland
5) Bad for England

For example, there is a disproportionate amount of Scottish soldiers in the UK army, what is Scotland going to do with all of the soldiers that have no jobs? There's no need for them to have a big army as they'll obviously go into a neutral status a la Ireland (which is, to be fair, commendable). As well as creating a strain on the Scottish economy there'll be a shortfall in the number of soldiers in the British army, although that could be solved by increasing recruitment, which would lower employment in the medium to long term.
Click to expand...

I could see a lot of them staying in the British Army. A good number of recruits in the British Army come from Commonwealth nations (in particular there are many Fijians), and even Irish nationals can (and occasionally do) join up. I'd see a lot of Scots doing that in the event of independence.
 
M

Meadows

Banned
Guerrillas in the Mist said:
I could see a lot of them staying in the British Army. A good number of recruits in the British Army come from Commonwealth nations (in particular there are many Fijians), and even Irish nationals can (and occasionally do) join up. I'd see a lot of Scots doing that in the event of independence.
Click to expand...

Would Scotland be leaving the commonwealth if it became independent?
 
R

radioheadrule83

Banned
The counties and more poverty stricken parts of London are the only bits with real people in or worth saving. If the desperately broke Euro-entente invaded us tomorrow, I wouldn't shed a tear if they raised central London to the ground - as long as nobody I knew was hurt of course. Its a shithole and I hate everything the 1sq mi City in particular represents. Don't talk economic reality to me, as horrible as it would be, the bulk of the country's inequality would be gone over night. The North needs a capital of its own. All flights, roads, ports and financial activity flows into London, and in times like this, some people there feel nothing of it compared to the rest of the country. Fuck the UK breaking up, England should break up! I'm a northerner living down south by the way. And sometimes I just hate everything.
 
J

J Tourettes

Banned
radioheadrule83 said:
The counties and more poverty stricken parts of London are the only bits with real people in or worth saving. If the desperately broke Euro-entente invaded us tomorrow, I wouldn't shed a tear if they raised central London to the ground - as long as nobody I knew was hurt of course. Its a shithole and I hate everything the 1sq mi City in particular represents. Don't talk economic reality to me, as horrible as it would be, the bulk of the country's inequality would be gone over night. The North needs a capital of its own. All flights, roads, ports and financial activity flows into London, and in times like this, some people there feel nothing of it compared to the rest of the country. Fuck the UK breaking up, England should break up! I'm a northerner living down south by the way. And sometimes I just hate everything.
Click to expand...
Central London has many council and housing association homes. To get the people you hate you'd be better off setting fire to the stockbroker belt.
 
M

Meadows

Banned
The UK needs state level government. Here are the states:

- London (capital: Westminster)
- South East (capital: I don't know, Cambridge or something)
- Cornwall (Truro)
- South West (Bristol)
- South Wales (Cardiff)
- North Wales (Bangor)
- West Midlands (Birmingham)
- East Midlands (Nottingham)
- Yorkshire (York)
- North West (Warrington)
- Cumbria (Carlisle)
- North East (Newcastle)
- Northern Ireland (Belfast)
- South/Central Scotland (Edinburgh)
- Highlands/Islands (Inverness)

boom
 
R

radioheadrule83

Banned
Meadows said:
The UK needs state level government. Here are the states:

- London (capital: Westminster)
- South East (capital: I don't know, Cambridge or something)
- Cornwall (Truro)
- South West (Bristol)
- South Wales (Cardiff)
- North Wales (Bangor)
- West Midlands (Birmingham)
- East Midlands (Nottingham)
- Yorkshire (York)
- North West (Manchester)
- Cumbria (Carlisle)
- North East (Newcastle)
- Northern Ireland (Belfast)
- South/Central Scotland (Edinburgh)
- Highlands/Islands (Inverness)

boom
Click to expand...
That north west capital would create a new breed of scouse terrorist
 
M

Meadows

Banned
CHEEZMO™;33462918 said:
What is there to do in Warrington? I've never been.

Is it shit?
Click to expand...

It's alright. Manchester and Liverpool have extended so far West and East respectively that Warrington just merges into a super-city.
 
K

kitch9

Banned
radioheadrule83 said:
The counties and more poverty stricken parts of London are the only bits with real people in or worth saving. If the desperately broke Euro-entente invaded us tomorrow, I wouldn't shed a tear if they raised central London to the ground - as long as nobody I knew was hurt of course. Its a shithole and I hate everything the 1sq mi City in particular represents. Don't talk economic reality to me, as horrible as it would be, the bulk of the country's inequality would be gone over night. The North needs a capital of its own. All flights, roads, ports and financial activity flows into London, and in times like this, some people there feel nothing of it compared to the rest of the country. Fuck the UK breaking up, England should break up! I'm a northerner living down south by the way. And sometimes I just hate everything.
Click to expand...

Uhm, we're not the only country with a capital city.... Do you resent the world.?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tell me about your favourite game ever.
2 3
119
4K
ReyBrujo replied
[VGC] Keighley weighs in on debate over Dave the Diver qualifying for Best Indie Game
Opinion News 2
86
6K
calistan replied
Shameless Bragging Thread. Tell me about your greatest gaming achievement.
2 3
146
3K
StreetsofBeige replied
Long live Tango Gameworks! 'Appreciation Thread'
2
63
5K
Hudo replied
Prozac made me go nuts (triggered a manic episode) and the resulting explosions ruined my relationship
0
1
Puscifer replied
Top Bottom